This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
PROBLEM: to study the effectiveness of the ad OBJECTIVE: ad making involves making different steps. Making an ad on the basis of needs of the consumer and then evaluation of the ad’s effectiveness. Evaluation of the ad can be done on two levels: communication effect and sales effect. Current study of effectiveness is done by communication effect using single recall where after showing the ad for sufficient time, the participants were given a questionnaire. METHOD: Design: to study the effectiveness of the ad using the communication effect research. This method involves determining whether the communication of the ad was effective or not by asking a representative group of people how they found the ad? Was the ad able to communicate effectively? What was lacking in the ad? Etc. within the communication effect we used the recall method, where the person is shown the ad once, he/she is allowed to look at it for sometime and then he/she is given an open-ended questionnaire to fill. Measure: a structured open-ended questionnaire was used to determine the effectiveness of the ad on topic of anti-smoking. The questionnaire was self-made under the guidance of the group coordinator. Participant: The sampling was purposive sampling, i.e. only those people who smoke were included in the study. The questionnaire was given to college undergraduates from Gargi College, Delhi University in the age range 17-22 who are regular smokers (frequency of smoking was 3-10 cigarettes per day) Procedure: A structured open-ended questionnaire was formed to determine the effectiveness of the ad made on anti-smoking previously. The questionnaire was made under the guidance of the group coordinator and contained questions regarding the information about smoking and questions about the ad e.g. whether the person liked the ad, what was the most attractive thing in the ad, was she convinced about the logic given, did the ad catch her attention, etc. the participants were shown the ad and then the questionnaire was administered to them. Next qualitative analysis was done for the questionnaire. RESULTS: Qualitative data is obtained from the questionnaire administered on 10 participants. Questions pertaining to different aspects were categorised under different headings so that the responses could be categorised as yes or no. Table 1 gives the various headings, the frequency of yes/no responses in that category. Subsequently the answers to each response were analysed using
chi-square (χ 2) goodness of fit test.635. If the χ2 value is greater than 6. 2x2 contingency table.01 level 11 9 0.8** Change in attitude towards smoking *Significant at .8** Appeal of headline 17 3 9.01 level.841 then it is significant at .05 level **Significant at .8** Attention grabbing 18 2 12. If the χ2 value obtained for the response category is greater than 3. The Frequency Of Responses And The Corresponding χ 2 Values Response category YES NO χ 2 Recall of headline 18 2 12. Table 1: Response Category.05 level.8** Persuaded by the ad’s argument 17 3 9. then it is significant at .8** Recall of pictures used in the ad 20 0 20** Read all the details in the ad 18 2 12.2** Recall of benefits of not smoking 15 5 5* Liked the ad 17 3 9. The χ2 value for each response category is given and the ones that are marked with *.8** Recall of most disorders due to smoking mentioned in the ad 16 4 7.2* DISCUSSION .
Attention grabbing and Persuaded by the ad’s argument.8. “I don’t mind anything happening to me but I can’t let it happen to people closest to me”. In addition the three people who didn’t like the headline thought it was . This can be a result of the emotional appeal used in the headline. p<. 18 out of 20 people were correctly able to recall the headline of the ad.05 level but not at . However Change in attitude towards smoking was non-significant at both .01 level. A person is expected to be more affected when something affects his/her family and friends. Some of the responses obtained are: “most of the ads tell you how smoking is bad for you. Recall of most disorders due to smoking mentioned in the ad. The qualitative responses obtained in the open-ended questionnaire supplemented this conclusion. From table 1 it can be seen that response categories that got a significant χ2 value at . This means that significantly higher number of people liked the headline. For this the recall method was used in which the ad was shown for sometime to the participant and then the open-ended questionnaire was given to the participant. “the very thought of it happening to my best friend or my boyfriend. Though the headline more or less had the desired impact on people. Recall of pictures used in the ad. 01 level). using the communication effect. p<. ran a chill down my spine”.05 level. It can be seen from table 1 that 17 people out of 20 liked the headline (χ 2 =9. Hence the participants of this study were girls from Gargi College who smoke. Appeal of headline.01 level were Recall of headline.88. The analysis of each response category and what the Χ2 significance for the category means is given in the following paragraphs. They believed that everyone had their own individual choice and we shouldn’t be forcing our view onto friends and family. Liked the ad. Recall of headline The recall of the headline was tested first. there were some people who didn’t like the usage of friends into the ad. Appeal of headline The second response category is the appeal of headline. 01) Thus we can conclude that significantly greater number of people were able to recall the headline “what do you want for yourself and your family?” this in turn means that the headline was catchy and grabbed the attention of most people.01 and . The ad was made on the topic of quit-smoking for a target group of young adults in college who smoke. The analysis is also substantiated by the qualitative responses obtained in the questionnaire. but this ad made me think how I am harming others along with me”.The aim of this experiment was to determine the effectiveness of the ad. (χ 2 =12. 8 people said that they really liked the headline because it made them see the whole idea of smoking from another perspective. Read all the details in the ad. Χ2 value for recall of benefits of ad was significant at .
the girl’s photograph caught the attention of a lot of people since the girl is a well-known personnel in the college. Read the details in the ad The forth response category was read the details in the ad. They would verbally argue the facts given in the ad. Recall of pictures The next response category was recall of pictures used in the ad. In addition to this. If a person doesn’t pay attention to the material in the ad. the main effectiveness of the ad would be determined by whether the participants were able to recall the negative effects of smoking that the more obvious ones. This means that significantly greater number of people were able to recall most of the disorders. which were mentioned in the ad (χ 2 = 7.01 level) said that they had read all the information in the ad and processed it simultaneously. This is in accordance with previous researches that state that on single exposure on most instances pictures are recalled better than words.2. They commented mostly on the photograph and tended to read the information written over the picture first. p< . p< . However two people were disinterested in the details and just scanned through the ad. This category would make certain if the ad was capable of grasping the attention of people enough for them to actually read all the details in the ad. Thus.e. it can cause decreased blood flow to the extremities and that you can save money by not smoking. Significantly greater number of people (χ 2 value=12. 16 participants were able to recall most of the disorders and disease caused by smoking. people would generally read the details aloud and compare whether they have that particular problem (effect of smoking) or not and whether they believed it or not.essential for a headline to be short and crisp. Out of the pictures. This showed that the ad was able to grasp their attention enough for them to read all the details given in the ad. Recall of most disorders due to smoking mentioned in the ad The basic idea of the ad was to convey the physical disorders other than lung cancer that can be a result of smoking. They nevertheless read the important details aloud like: smoking causes cancer. From table 1 it is evident that this category had the highest recall. thus the ad was able to successfully convey the harmful results other than the more common ones to the participants. All 20 participants were able to recall which pictures were used in the ad. they are able to drown out the written content. This can be confirmed from the observation of the participants’ verbal and non-verbal language while reading the ad. I. This response category was closely related to the earlier one. most people found picture of the smoker’s lung the most disgusting and said that it grabbed their attention in the ad before anything else. Out of a sample of 20 people. the recall . The response category catering to this was recall of disorders due to smoking.01 levels). Because the pictures are processed faster and at deeper semantic levels.8.
Though numerically the difference between the two isn’t large.01 level whereas the recall of benefits of smoking is sig. this is because red light has the highest speed out of all the coloured lights and thus reaches the eye fastest. Infact.of the material is not possible. p<. Thus the red colour was given as a base on the smoker’s lung side since red signifies danger and caution among other things. Liked the ad The next response category is liked the ad. The participants who gave an overall positive response to the ad or mentioned that they liked the ad were significantly higher (n=17) who gave a negative response (n=3) or mentioned that they didn’t like the ad (χ2 = 9. However some people mentioned that the ad had too much information and that a shorter message might have been more effective. This corresponds to a χ2 value of 12. at . Attention grabbing 18 people out of 20 said that the ad was attention grabbing. Also the participants mentioned “the . Since the ad had a lot of information it was important to include more pictures to grab the attention of the reader.01 level. Other attention-grabbing feature was the picture of the cigarette and the girl’s photograph. 01 level). This shows that fear appeal may work slightly better than positive appeal. The red and black contrast made it eye catching and in the face. Recall of benefits of not smoking The frequency of who were able to recall benefits of not smoking was 15 (χ 2 = 5.8.8. The chief reason they stated for grabbing attention was the picture of the lung and the girl. at . Participants said. This technique worked pretty well as was seen from a high recall of material written in the ad.05 levels) Like the previous response category. The ad gave the benefits of not smoking as well as the harmful effects of smoking in order to inculcate both a positive appeal and negative appeal approach. The separate questions in open-ended questionnaire for disorders of smoking and benefits of smoking were done to see the relative effects of both the appeals.01 level. The red colour ensured that the person would notice the smoker’s lung and associate it with danger. “the ad practically gives all the information about smoking”. statistically the recall for disorders of smoking is sig. These two pictures then further motivated them to read what all is written in the poster. Research has proved that red colour attracts more attention than any other colour. Thus significantly greater number of people liked the ad. “I didn’t know there were so many health risks because of smoking”. people described the ad as “very informative”. recall of material is a function of attention paid to the material while reading it. this category is also related earlier mentioned response category: read details in the ad. p< . “The colour contrast was the first thing to grab my attention”. which is significant at .05 level but not at .
Thus significantly large number of people mentioned that they were persuaded by the ad and the information given in it. “everyone has some or the problem. Any change in behaviour first starts with an increase in awareness and knowledge. Persuaded by the ad’s argument The participants were asked whether they were persuaded and why they were or were not persuaded. people were persuaded by a large variety of reasons. 17 people said that they were persuaded by the ad which corresponds to a χ2 value of 9. This may explain the low frequency of participants who agree to quit smoking despite the overwhelming positive response in other categories.2 which is not significant. There may be deep-rooted reasons for people to smoke. As seen by these responses. the rest of the participants who gave a negative response in this category said “the ad was persuasive but I haven’t developed any of those problems”. Most people saw the picture of the lungs foremost in the ad and that remained in the mind later on as well. This disparity is because through ads it is difficult to change the attitude of people. Mostly they were influenced by the information in the ad. 3 of the participants said they “I don’t know why I would not try to quit smoking”. they would not try to quit smoking.ad kept my attention because of all the pictures used”. Participants said “I can’t get the picture of the smoker’s lung out of my head” Change in attitude towards smoking Out of 20 participants only 10 said there would be an active effort from their side to stop smoking.g. the affective level and the behavioural level.8.01 level. E. Though the ad might have been able to increase the person’s awareness and may have been able to persuade a favourable belief about quitting smoking but the behaviour component is dependent on many other factors. This corresponds to a χ2 value of . “smoking causes so many health problems no only for yourself but everyone around”. The responses were categorized as yes and no. Though most people were persuaded by the ad and said that they were convinced that smoking was bad for health. There are three levels of attitude: the cognitive level. Despite the high attention grabbing ability and high persuasion of the ad as noted in the participants’ responses. “no one I know has developed these problems due to smoking”. The reasons as to why they were persuaded were “because of the information in the ad”. Hence the informative appeal used in the ad while making it was effective in persuading people. how does it matter if I have mine due to smoking”. In addition the fear appeal used-picture of lungs of smokers also worked pretty well. significant at . etc. “and I have reasons to quit smoking now”. then a person develops a belief and then the belief may or may not correspond to action. the person may be addicted to smoking. there might be peer pressure to continue smoking. . “I don’t want my lungs to look black and ugly”. which could not be debated via a poster. smoking may be a source of vent for the person. the attitude change towards trying to quit smoking was very low.
Also significantly greater number of people were drawn towards the ad. 9 out of 20 participants tried to quit smoking this means that 45% of the people who viewed the ad quit smoking.Nevertheless. This value is a good enough number for the effectiveness of an ad. the picture of lungs and the heading all were well received by the target group and had the desired effect on them. pictures. Though some participants suggested that the written material was too much. most people said that the ad provided valuable information which was the key factor which persuaded them. said it grabbed their attention and were persuaded by the ad. . the ad was able to persuade 9 participants enough for them to try to quit smoking. The overall effectiveness of the ad seems to be quite good. the ad was effective. etc was high. written material. This number may not be statistically significant but the number itself is good enough. The recall of headline. The colour contrast. Thus according the communication effect research method.
google. London. Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective.. J.com/marketing-advertising/advertising/345030-1. D. 'Consumer Behavior ' (Dryden Press.L.in/books? id=3DqkMb97xoUC&pg=PA147&lpg=PA147&dq=pictures+better+recall+in+ad&source=bl&ots=8 5LZScHvWE&sig=aKE1PryiWPKi5975m9oTNBQtL5Q&hl=en&ei=TBG5SfebLM_kAWGy5CbCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result#PPA150. Sites http://www.REFERENCES Books Belch.G. 2004) Engel. 1978) Schiffman.allbusiness. McGraw Hill. L. G. A.co. and Blackwell. Kollatt. D. London.html http://www.questia. Consumer Behavior: Concepts and Applications.M1 .. E. R. (6 th: New York: NY: McGraw-Hill. (1993).com/library/communication/advertising-and-public-relations/advertisingresearch/advertising-recall. M. Prentice Hall International. & Belch. Loudon. (1988).jsp http://books. Consumer Behavior.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.